Will Combat be Action Point based?

One week "Ask A Dev" event. Closed to new threads.
Locked
User avatar
Woolfe
Supreme Jerk
Posts: 5625
Joined: March 22nd, 2012, 6:42 pm

Re: Will Combat be Action Point based?

Post by Woolfe » December 23rd, 2012, 3:43 am

Not going to quote anyone, cause i am on my phone, and its a pain in the proverbial.
However, why would you necessarily change aps used based on weapon type. Somethings might make sense. But most weapons would take about the same time i would have thought.
My advocation of the ap system is mostly related to the other stuff. Inventoty, grenades healing communication special actions, melee etc etc etc
It's not too late. Make it Eight!

User avatar
b0rsuk
Scholar
Posts: 232
Joined: April 22nd, 2012, 12:09 pm

Re: Will Combat be Action Point based?

Post by b0rsuk » December 23rd, 2012, 7:20 am

DarkTwinkie wrote: Characters with higher speed attributes will get more turns than those with lower speed attributes. Put more points into speed if you'd like to attack more in any given combat encounter.
I don't like this. It sounds like Heroes of Might and Magic V. Long story short, this makes Speed an extremely important stat for combat. It is a damage multiplier. Maximize speed and damage-affecting stat and you wipe out your opponents before they have a chance to act. The only disadvantage is consuming more ammo.

I would prefer something like in Heroes of Might and Magic III: there's no Your Turn and Enemy Turn, but speed affects the order of acting,

User avatar
under_dog
Explorer
Posts: 251
Joined: November 20th, 2012, 4:25 am

Re: Will Combat be Action Point based?

Post by under_dog » December 23rd, 2012, 7:39 am

Woolfe wrote:Not going to quote anyone, cause i am on my phone, and its a pain in the proverbial.
However, why would you necessarily change aps used based on weapon type. Somethings might make sense. But most weapons would take about the same time i would have thought.
My advocation of the ap system is mostly related to the other stuff. Inventoty, grenades healing communication special actions, melee etc etc etc
While i dont think APs use i to be taken as a way to achieve simulation, different APs usage between different weapon types makes sense. Even within a single familly - lets take pistols - while pulling the trigger might be equal for every firearm, things like aiming a second shot, managing recoil, adapting sights to the targets range can be very different.
A colt .45 has a big recoil making chainig 2 shots a daunting task, but at the same time, the sheer size of the round makes aiming more forgiving.
Now if you chamber the same pistol with .38/9mm amunition, you'll have far less reccoil, hance a more steady aim for chained shots but with less stopping power and with a far more unforgiving aimig required to deal the same damage as the .45 ammunition.
Depending on your play type (or PC build) one type of ammunition will suit you more than the other. It makes sense to me that differnt AP usage would be used to recreate that, or we'd just have to seek for the higher caliber and spray paint our targets.
That's the kind of difference in use that you see in real life.

User avatar
Priest4hire
Explorer
Posts: 480
Joined: May 9th, 2012, 12:38 pm

Re: Will Combat be Action Point based?

Post by Priest4hire » December 23rd, 2012, 8:50 am

A quick search found this.. Yeah, I'm not seeing the brutal recoil of the .45 preventing this fellow from putting all 7 rounds on target and in a decent enough group. Looking at the slow-mo, there's a little rise after the first shot, but beyond that the recoil seems more than manageable. And he admits to not being an expert. If this were the 10mm, one might have a better case. But keep in mind that the strength and ability of the shooter can make a huge difference here. Some people can shoot the 10mm quickly and keep the rounds on target.

Also note this would also make assault rifles faster thanks to the combination of relatively low powered rifle rounds and the size and stability of the weapon. An M16A4 can put more shots on target at greater range and speed than a handgun. I know this would effectively balance handguns into very second class weapons. But weird as it might seem, I don't think one needs to make handguns into practical primary weapons any more than one has to balance knives, rocks or pointy sticks into such a role.

User avatar
b0rsuk
Scholar
Posts: 232
Joined: April 22nd, 2012, 12:09 pm

Re: Will Combat be Action Point based?

Post by b0rsuk » December 23rd, 2012, 8:57 am

Different AP usage for weaker/stronger weapons is faking weapon variety through rate of fire. I made a entire thread about it here:

http://wasteland.inxile-entertainment.c ... f=8&t=1856

The stoopid idea needs to die. It makes weapons interchangeable. A soldier shouldn't shoot 1000% times faster than a tank cannon.

---------

Pistols may not be more accurate or faster to shoot than rifles, but they are more compact making them a good choice for tight spaces. There's no use pulling the trigger if the barrel is stuck in the doorway.

User avatar
under_dog
Explorer
Posts: 251
Joined: November 20th, 2012, 4:25 am

Re: Will Combat be Action Point based?

Post by under_dog » December 23rd, 2012, 9:15 am

.45 ACP is actually 11,43 mm, and grouping shots on a 21 feets and closing target... Well...
You could also argue that a cold barrel lessen the precision of a shot etc.. We're merely discussing a set of rules that manages combat in a computer game, so i really think that you have to balance thing so that knives/handguns/throwing weapons are manageable classes as primary weapons.
Maybe a trained ninja would tear a marine to pieces, or maybe not, but i don't think the system that would emulate this case the best would be the ultimate gaming experience :|

Kyuu
Initiate
Posts: 2
Joined: December 22nd, 2012, 10:16 pm

Re: Will Combat be Action Point based?

Post by Kyuu » December 23rd, 2012, 4:13 pm

Mandemon wrote:Fallout had limited, around 10 AP. Each step took one. It had simple AP system, so you didn't need to count.

Compare X-COM or Jagged Alliance, where numbers are above 50 AP per turn. X-COM was particularly bad, since you needed external sheet to see how much each action would cost and how much you had left.
Right, but I'm fairly sure the intent here is to make the AP system more like Fallout, not a bloated 93843 AP system like X-Com.

User avatar
SniperHF
Adventurer
Posts: 748
Joined: March 5th, 2012, 6:32 pm

Re: Will Combat be Action Point based?

Post by SniperHF » December 23rd, 2012, 6:31 pm

b0rsuk wrote:
DarkTwinkie wrote: Characters with higher speed attributes will get more turns than those with lower speed attributes. Put more points into speed if you'd like to attack more in any given combat encounter.
I don't like this. It sounds like Heroes of Might and Magic V. Long story short, this makes Speed an extremely important stat for combat. It is a damage multiplier. Maximize speed and damage-affecting stat and you wipe out your opponents before they have a chance to act. The only disadvantage is consuming more ammo.

I would prefer something like in Heroes of Might and Magic III: there's no Your Turn and Enemy Turn, but speed affects the order of acting,
That's certainly a concern of mine so far. Speed could be incredibly overpowered. Hard to make too many judgements on it with limited information but it definitely sent up a red flag.

What you are talking about from HOMM III sounds more like sequence than speed. But that's usually a derived number and not a base number in straight up CRPGS. A game like HOMM is a fair bit different since its a hybrid, since those stats also deal with the world map. Where as Wasteland 2 already has things like Outdoorsman and Evasion to deal with that it looks like. Unless of course speed affects outdoorsman which is getting into TDE territory. I'm personally not a huge fan of 3+ base stats influencing skills. Keeping it to 1-2 is preferable IMO.

User avatar
Drool
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8756
Joined: March 17th, 2012, 9:58 pm
Location: Under Tenebrosia, doing shots with Sceadu.

Re: Will Combat be Action Point based?

Post by Drool » December 23rd, 2012, 8:05 pm

dorkboy wrote:as to the exact number of foes, my point was that since combat will have some kind of AP system (possibly inspired by the games the devs were looking at) it will also be necessary to scale battle sizes accordingly.
coming up with absurd examples of what would not work/be interesting is fine as a method of elimination (what to avoid) - but as you so aptly put it: [picture of a strange guy with a funny hat].
Um. I bring up how many AP systems choke and die on large combats and mention a large combat in the original game. You say "have small combats". I defend having large combats. You claim I'm building strawmen? I... don't see how that follows.
Alwa nasci korliri das.

I neither work, nor speak, for inXile.

Not too late; make it eight!

User avatar
reiniat
Scholar
Posts: 191
Joined: July 5th, 2012, 12:58 pm

Re: Will Combat be Action Point based?

Post by reiniat » December 23rd, 2012, 9:24 pm

TΛPETRVE wrote:semi-concealed cyber-ganglion
I lol'd hard
dorkboy wrote:
Drool wrote:Compare to Wasteland, where there's a fight with close to 100 foes. Or, hell, just try doing the Bard's Tale 1 barbarian fight. With the max scroll speed and not thinking about your actions, that fight take over an hour. Now just try to imagine it with a one-at-a-time AP system.
or try imagining it with.. less foes?

Being something from the original Wasteland i believe that a mechanic that doesnt support >100 foes is wrong for Wasteland 2
Kyuu wrote:Right, but I'm fairly sure the intent here is to make the AP system more like Fallout, not a bloated 93843 AP system like X-Com.
Maybe in order to keep the numbers low devs can make steps take a fraction of an AP, like 0.25, once you use a fraction of one AP it counts as if you used the whole AP in terms of other actions (shooting), so a system capped at 10 AP can be done. (and you would only need to count to 4 for each AP, i hope you guys can handle that)
SniperHF wrote:Speed could be incredibly overpowered.
I tought on that too, but since its overpowerness seems to obvious im sure devs already adressed that situation.
b0rsuk wrote:Different AP usage for weaker/stronger weapons is faking weapon variety through rate of fire. I made a entire thread about it here:
http://wasteland.inxile-entertainment.c ... f=8&t=1856
The stoopid idea needs to die. It makes weapons interchangeable. A soldier shouldn't shoot 1000% times faster than a tank cannon.
Youre right (it was one of the things that made Skyrim combat dull), but only when there are no other important stats that matter into the formula, (chance to hit, range, spread, AC, DT, DR, ammo type, etc,etc,etc.).
A system like the one you described needs to be very simplistic to effectively make those two weapons interchangeable, and that would make the game dull and flavorless.
YAY! the devs at 343i need to read your post about making weapons interchangeable, i still cant believe how stoopidly they balanced the Covenant Carbine and the DMR with the rest of he guns at Halo 4...
b0rsuk wrote: Pistols may not be more accurate or faster to shoot than rifles, but they are more compact making them a good choice for tight spaces. There's no use pulling the trigger if the barrel is stuck in the doorway.
I never understood the whole idea of "tight spaces", how many times in the game will we be fighting at 1m of the enemy? it is such a marginal way of balancing a gun
Sorry for my ugly english
"We're all gorebags"

User avatar
Drool
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8756
Joined: March 17th, 2012, 9:58 pm
Location: Under Tenebrosia, doing shots with Sceadu.

Re: Will Combat be Action Point based?

Post by Drool » December 23rd, 2012, 9:41 pm

reiniat wrote:I never understood the whole idea of "tight spaces", how many times in the game will we be fighting at 1m of the enemy? it is such a marginal way of balancing a gun
Well, tight spaces can happen. I mean, there's no reason there can't be tunnels or sewers or the like. And the original had close quarters combat with foes ambushing at 4 feet (not that it meant much then...).
Alwa nasci korliri das.

I neither work, nor speak, for inXile.

Not too late; make it eight!

User avatar
dorkboy
Master
Posts: 1772
Joined: November 26th, 2012, 10:37 am

Re: Will Combat be Action Point based?

Post by dorkboy » December 23rd, 2012, 10:18 pm

Drool wrote:Yes, because having tiny battles with 3 actors are always so memorable. Man, that fight with the single cur and the one imp was so memorable and totally different than that one fight with the imp and the one cur.
dorkboy wrote:as to the exact number of foes, my point was that since combat will have some kind of AP system (possibly inspired by the games the devs were looking at) it will also be necessary to scale battle sizes accordingly.
Drool wrote:You say "have small combats".
:roll:
question: was the scorpitron fight a tiny battle?

a game system that can handle huge amounts of simultaneous combatants will probably have memorable battles where there are huge amounts of simultaneous combatants. whether or not a particular fight is memorable (in a good way, i mean) will depend on a lot of factors, obviously, where the sheer amount of enemies is only one of them.
marmelade & jam

User avatar
Drool
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8756
Joined: March 17th, 2012, 9:58 pm
Location: Under Tenebrosia, doing shots with Sceadu.

Re: Will Combat be Action Point based?

Post by Drool » December 23rd, 2012, 11:49 pm

dorkboy wrote:question: was the scorpitron fight a tiny battle?
It was one foe. That's rather smaller than 90 temple guardians.
Alwa nasci korliri das.

I neither work, nor speak, for inXile.

Not too late; make it eight!

User avatar
Woolfe
Supreme Jerk
Posts: 5625
Joined: March 22nd, 2012, 6:42 pm

Re: Will Combat be Action Point based?

Post by Woolfe » December 24th, 2012, 1:14 am

reiniat wrote:
SniperHF wrote:Speed could be incredibly overpowered.
I tought on that too, but since its overpowerness seems to obvious im sure devs already adressed that situation.
I was thinking about this. You could have Speed be the number of AP's but the number of AP's Needed to perform an action are actually based on other attributes.

So then your coordination plays a part. Or maybe your strength if it is a really heavy item, or maybe if its a complex bit of equipment your intelligence. Parley, speech etc etc

In fact that would be a reason enough for me to have a multi ap system :D

Edit: Broken Quote
Last edited by Woolfe on December 24th, 2012, 3:59 am, edited 1 time in total.
It's not too late. Make it Eight!

User avatar
b0rsuk
Scholar
Posts: 232
Joined: April 22nd, 2012, 12:09 pm

Re: Will Combat be Action Point based?

Post by b0rsuk » December 24th, 2012, 3:45 am

1. There's more to Action Points than X-COM

Take a look at Mission In Space: The Lost Colony. It's a very fun tactics game (my favorite flash game by far). It has two pools of points: Movement Points which are used for movement exclusively, and Action Points which are used for shooting, reloading, operating switches, and using skills.

Each pool is very small actually - default is 4 movement points which allows to move 4 hexes. You get 6 action points, this is up to 6 bursts fired. Movement and action points are independent from each other, and it gives the game extra flexibility compared to X-COM. There are few exceptions: Sprint skill lowers AP but increases MP. "Alert" mode enables reaction fire (It triggers each time an alien moves, as long as you have ammo ! Yay !) but reduces MP by 2 at the start of next turn.

MIS uses the action point mechanic, plays fast, and is deeply tactical. Positioning matters a lot. Skills, both passive and active, make individual marines feel substantially different. Weapons are balanced by function and availability. Automatic shotgun is very deadly, but has short range and comes with less ammo (3x5). Assault rifle has very long range, moderate power, and the most plentiful ammo (6x5). Flamer kills stuff in a large area, but can be fired once per turn and has only 3/6 ammo. You get only 2/4 bombs. Balancing weapons by ammo availability totally makes sense in a post-apoc game like Wasteland 2.
http://www.kongregate.com/games/StormAl ... ost-colony

2. Why not simultaneous turns ?
Laser Squad Nemesis, a game by X-COM designer, has simultaneous turns. Instead of action points and time artifacts associated, each turn is 10 seconds. You plan the action of each soldier ahead of the time. When you press "End turn", all characters on the battlefield act simultaneously. Reaction time is measured in fractions of a second. In general, you get seconds instead of action points. Frozen Synapse is a more modern example of this system, but it's much more limited.

User avatar
Drool
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8756
Joined: March 17th, 2012, 9:58 pm
Location: Under Tenebrosia, doing shots with Sceadu.

Re: Will Combat be Action Point based?

Post by Drool » December 24th, 2012, 7:59 pm

b0rsuk wrote:2. Why not simultaneous turns ?
Laser Squad Nemesis, a game by X-COM designer, has simultaneous turns. Instead of action points and time artifacts associated, each turn is 10 seconds. You plan the action of each soldier ahead of the time. When you press "End turn", all characters on the battlefield act simultaneously. Reaction time is measured in fractions of a second. In general, you get seconds instead of action points. Frozen Synapse is a more modern example of this system, but it's much more limited.
Yeah, I'd been holding out hope for simultaneous phase based. Ah well.
Alwa nasci korliri das.

I neither work, nor speak, for inXile.

Not too late; make it eight!

User avatar
undecaf
Explorer
Posts: 377
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 5:48 am

Re: Will Combat be Action Point based?

Post by undecaf » December 25th, 2012, 12:31 am

b0rsuk wrote: 2. Why not simultaneous turns ?
I wouldn't like that. I tend to find simultaneous turns just messy and not really exciting or involving in the same way as traditional turns (with AP consumption for individual actions).
"A human being in his last extremity IS a bag of shit."

User avatar
Mandemon
Adventurer
Posts: 925
Joined: April 5th, 2012, 11:49 am

Re: Will Combat be Action Point based?

Post by Mandemon » December 25th, 2012, 1:15 am

b0rsuk wrote: 2. Why not simultaneous turns ?
Laser Squad Nemesis, a game by X-COM designer, has simultaneous turns. Instead of action points and time artifacts associated, each turn is 10 seconds. You plan the action of each soldier ahead of the time. When you press "End turn", all characters on the battlefield act simultaneously. Reaction time is measured in fractions of a second. In general, you get seconds instead of action points. Frozen Synapse is a more modern example of this system, but it's much more limited.
I have been hoping for this too. It's either very small turns, or simultaneous turns that allow faster turns.

User avatar
Wile
Adventurer
Posts: 527
Joined: April 9th, 2012, 1:40 am
Location: Finland

Re: Will Combat be Action Point based?

Post by Wile » December 25th, 2012, 2:42 am

One example of some “fat” we’re attempting to trim is the wait time you have during the enemy turn. If multiple enemies are in the rotation to act before a players character is, they will all move and attack together. We also hate being forced into a fight with enemies that you can mop the floor with.”

source: http://www.vg247.com/2012/10/14/wastela ... ad_combat/
I guess it is confirmed then (as I said earlier in this thread) that enemies move and attack simultaneously. Although I wonder how this would work out when large group of enemies move and attack. What if enemies would move in groups of, let's say, 5-10?

Lirpakkaa
Scholar
Posts: 134
Joined: March 8th, 2012, 11:28 am

Re: Will Combat be Action Point based?

Post by Lirpakkaa » December 25th, 2012, 3:45 am

b0rsuk wrote:1. There's more to Action Points than X-COM

Take a look at Mission In Space: The Lost Colony. It's a very fun tactics game (my favorite flash game by far). It has two pools of points: Movement Points which are used for movement exclusively, and Action Points which are used for shooting, reloading, operating switches, and using skills.

Each pool is very small actually - default is 4 movement points which allows to move 4 hexes. You get 6 action points, this is up to 6 bursts fired. Movement and action points are independent from each other, and it gives the game extra flexibility compared to X-COM. There are few exceptions: Sprint skill lowers AP but increases MP. "Alert" mode enables reaction fire (It triggers each time an alien moves, as long as you have ammo ! Yay !) but reduces MP by 2 at the start of next turn.

MIS uses the action point mechanic, plays fast, and is deeply tactical. Positioning matters a lot. Skills, both passive and active, make individual marines feel substantially different. Weapons are balanced by function and availability. Automatic shotgun is very deadly, but has short range and comes with less ammo (3x5). Assault rifle has very long range, moderate power, and the most plentiful ammo (6x5). Flamer kills stuff in a large area, but can be fired once per turn and has only 3/6 ammo. You get only 2/4 bombs. Balancing weapons by ammo availability totally makes sense in a post-apoc game like Wasteland 2.
http://www.kongregate.com/games/StormAl ... ost-colony

2. Why not simultaneous turns ?
Laser Squad Nemesis, a game by X-COM designer, has simultaneous turns. Instead of action points and time artifacts associated, each turn is 10 seconds. You plan the action of each soldier ahead of the time. When you press "End turn", all characters on the battlefield act simultaneously. Reaction time is measured in fractions of a second. In general, you get seconds instead of action points. Frozen Synapse is a more modern example of this system, but it's much more limited.
These are good ideas, the thing I most hate about the usual AP system is how unimaginative and ridiculous the "speed" stat is - as if how fast you can run would at all correlate with how fast you can shoot, or tend wounds, or whatever.




Originally I had it for a given that the game would have phase-based combat like the original had, just more detailed. Disappointed that this isn't the case.

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest